December 15, 2009

Back in 1991-1993, I long-distance managed two employees who were stationed near Wal-Mart headquarters in Bentonville, Arkansas, a small town not far over the border from Missouri, Oklahoma, and Kansas. (Local legend had it that Sam Walton had picked out Bentonville because of its easy access to four different hunting seasons). So, I made a lot of visits to Bentonville.

It was a nice place: pleasant rolling countryside. The locals were friendly, and happy they were finally catching up to the rest of the country in prosperity. Low level Wal-Mart employees, such as assistant shoe department manager, had gotten in on Wal-Mart stock options early and hence were retiring to lake front homes.

In contrast, the upper ranks of Wal-Mart management were the brusquest clients I ever dealt with. Yet, they had principled reasons for treating visiting salesmen like me like dirt: they felt that America corporate life was corrupted by all the little favors salesmen did their clients, like taking them to nice restaurants and NFL games, and that they owed it to their stockholders (including stockholder-in-chief Sam Walton) to maximize profits rather than maximize the lifestyles of managers.

As far as I could tell, at the time, most of Wal-Mart's headquarters staff, including their brilliant IT department, were recruited from middle America.

Most of the Merchant Princes of the second half of the 20th Century, Leslie Wexner, Bernie Marcus, and so forth, were Jewish, and most at home serving metropolitan areas. Sam Walton, the greatest merchant of the era, however, was a product of the underserved middle of the country. He got started quietly building the biggest retail chain in world history by better meeting the needs of the kind of small town folks whom he understood better than than urban merchants.

Big city companies like mine were opening satellite offices to better serve at Wal-Marts' beck and call, and tended to rotate in big city outsiders. Of the two people whom I inherited to manage in Bentonville, one was a local good old boy, and one was a transplant from the East Coast, either Jewish or Italian, I forget which. She liked it a lot in Bentonville -- it was cheap, the locals were friendly, and business was heading up -- and was intent on staying.

Hence, Bentonville is one of the few small towns in middle America with a growing Jewish population, for which it has attracted, unsurprisingly, a fair amount of media attention.

From a book review by Jay P. Greene, a Jewish professor at the U. of Arkansas (35 miles away in Fayetteville) in the Wall Street Journal of Boom Town: How Wal*Mart Transformed an All-American Town into an International Community by Marjorie Rosen.

In recent years, Tyson Foods, J.B. Hunt Trucking and, most prominent of all, Wal-Mart have attracted workers from across the globe to the tiny corner of northwest Arkansas where the companies are headquartered. The effect on the local community, according to Marjorie Rosen in "Boom Town," has been "cold stark fear—at least among a segment of the white Christian majority, which sees its comfortable, all-white way of life fading."

But very little in "Boom Town," an engaging if sometimes distorted community portrait, actually supports this storyline of white Christians resenting the influx of diverse newcomers. Instead, we learn about African-American, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu groups blending rather smoothly into business and social life in Bentonville, Ark. (Wal-Mart's home base), and the surrounding area. Peaches Coleman, the African-American wife of Wal-Mart's now-retired director of human resources, captures the real state of community relations. She remembers that "people threw bricks at our house" when she was growing up in Chicago; but in northwest Arkansas, she reports, her white neighbors "reached out to us in many ways that they didn't really have to . . . and in ways that have endeared this place to me."

There are really two distinct narratives in "Boom Town." One shows the ease with which well-educated African-American, Jewish, Muslim and Hindu newcomers have been accepted by local residents; the other shows the difficulties that low-skilled Hispanics have experienced, many of whom were attracted to the region by jobs at Tyson's chicken-processing plants. Ms. Rosen tries hard but can't comfortably combine the two into a single narrative about how white, rural Christians react to diversity. Besides, her accounts of police tension with low-income minorities and of over-reaction to illegal immigration could as easily be told about any American city. Being the "buckle of the Bible Belt" does not seem to make things any worse than in Phoenix or New York.

Ms. Rosen seems to expect that there should be especially severe problems with the acceptance of diverse newcomers in a geographical area that is, as she repeatedly puts it, "emphatically Christian." Instead, she finds that people of faith have an easy time understanding and accepting one another, including people who belong to different religious traditions, because they share a respect for religious belief. This type of tolerance is common in semi-rural northwest Arkansas but is not so common, one suspects, in the media and political centers that dot the coasts. ...

"Boom Town" does reveal some biased thinking, but it is often Ms. Rosen's own. In her epilogue she provides a stereotype-laden description of how she was pulled over by the Bentonville police for driving slowly through a construction zone at midnight. The police obviously suspected that she was drunk and subjected her to a sobriety test. In Ms. Rosen's mind the particular policeman who confronted her "regards me as though I were an alien . . . just arrived from an alternate universe called New York City." She continues: "My heart races as the boy-cop looks through my pocketbook, perhaps for a kilo of marijuana or a fifth of moonshine." Moonshine? The irony of associating Arkansans with moonshine in a book condemning stereotypes appears to be lost on the author.

Actually, when trying to navigate my rental car from Bentonville to the airport while talking business strategy on my first cell phone in 1991, I got so lost I ended up way up a holler with guys sitting on the front porches of their shacks, giving me very suspicious looks. I don't know if they were wondering whether I was a revenooer from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms out to look for their stills, but I like to think they were.

Anyway, there's not much money to be made in writing about how things are actually pretty nice in Bentonville. And there's little downside for distorting the situation. So, why not do it?

A 2006 New York Times article, "In Wal-Mart's Home, Synagogue Signals Growth," gives a less tendentious account than Ms. Rosen's book. This article is unusual in attributing agency to Jews, who are more typically treated by the press as purely passive individuals who get pushed around by yokels.

Recruited from around the country as workers for Wal-Mart or one of its suppliers, hundreds of which have opened offices near the retailer's headquarters here, a growing number of Jewish families have become increasingly vocal proponents of religious neutrality in the county. They have asked school principals to rename Christmas vacation as winter break (many have) and lobbied the mayor's office to put a menorah on the town square (it did).

Wal-Mart has transformed small towns across America, but perhaps its greatest impact has been on Bentonville, where the migration of executives from cities like New York, Boston and Atlanta has turned this sedate rural community into a teeming mini-metropolis populated by Hindus, Muslims and Jews.

It is the Jews of Benton County, however, who have asserted themselves most. Two years ago, they opened the county's first synagogue and, ever since, its roughly 100 members have become eager spokesmen and women for a religion that remains a mystery to most people here.

When the synagogue celebrated its first bar mitzvah, the boy's father — Scott Winchester, whose company sells propane tanks to Wal-Mart — invited two local radio D.J.'s, who broadcast the event across the county, even though, by their own admission, they had only a vague idea of what a bar mitzvah was.

"Jesus was Jewish," one D.J. noted in a dispatch from the reception at a local hotel. The other remarked, "I love Seinfeld."

Shortly after he moved to the area, Tom Douglass, a member of the synagogue who works in Wal-Mart's logistics department, made a presentation about Hanukkah to his son's kindergarten class. The lesson, complete with an explanation of how to play with a spinning dreidel and compete for chocolate coins, imported from New York, proved so popular that the school's librarian taped it for future classes....

Not everyone is ordering the knishes, but Christians throughout Benton County are slowly learning the complexities of Jewish life. Gary Compton, the superintendent of schools in Bentonville and a member of a Methodist church in town, has learned not to schedule PTA meetings the night before Jewish holidays, which begin at sundown, and has encouraged the high school choir to incorporate Jewish songs into a largely Christian lineup.

"We need to get better at some things," he said. "You just don't go from being noninclusive to being inclusive overnight."

Surrounded by Christian neighbors, Bible study groups, 100-foot-tall crucifixes and free copies of the book "The Truth About Mary Magdalene" left in the seating area of the Bentonville IHOP, the Jews of Benton County say they have become more observant in — and protective of — their faith than ever before.

Marcy Winchester, the mother of the synagogue's first bar mitzvah, said, "You have to try harder to be Jewish down here."...

There were, for example, Betsy and Marc Rosen, who moved to Benton County from Chicago in 2000 after Mr. Rosen was offered a job in Wal-Mart's technology department. The family did not attend a synagogue in Chicago because, Mrs. Rosen said, "you didn't need a synagogue to have a Jewish identity." There were Jewish neighbors, Jewish friends, Jewish family.

But not in Bentonville, where her daughter brought home from day care a picture of Jesus to color in. Suddenly, a synagogue did not seem like a luxury anymore, but a necessity to preserve her family's Jewish heritage.

In summary, some of Bentonville's Jews, most of them not very religious, highly assimilated corporate staffers from Suburban America, upon finding themselves in a heavily Christian region, rediscover and aggressively assert their Jewishness, using their advantages in media-savviness and argumentativeness to shake things up locally. Keep in mind that the number of Jews in Benton County, population 203,107, remains tiny: the synagogue had about 100 members in 2006, so the various changes that the polite locals graciously made in their customs at the insistence of Bentonville's Jews benefit only a tiny fraction of the community.

My guess would be that most Jews in Bentonville would prefer not to inconvenience the locals by making a big stink about how Christmas vacation is called "Christmas vacation" instead of "Winter break." (Here's Tom Piatak's 2006 VDARE.com article on Christmas I mean Winter in Bentonville.)

But there's no conceptual vocabulary in 21st Century America anymore for talking sense to the handful who get a kick, like George Costanza's father on Festivus, out of "the airing of grievances." They wouldn't schedule a PTA meeting on Christmas Eve, would they? Why should the majority rule? The minority should be equal to the majority!

In the 21st Century, Jewish Studies is perhaps the most understudied field of knowledge relative to its importance in understanding how the contemporary world works, and Bentonville provides an interesting case study of tendencies under the mildest of circumstances.

It's stories like this that you encounter all the time that make all those counterarguments that consist of, "Jews have assimilated into Protestant/Unitarian/Universalist culture and are just acting like Prods/Unitarians/Universalists" and "Kevin MacDonald is a crazy nut" seem, um, ineffectual.

So when do the civil rights lawsuits begin? Have the multi-cultural commissars demanded the right to vet the local school curriculums yet? Will they have a Gay Pride parade anytime soon? Is section 8 housing on it's way ? We can't let any white, Christian enclave get away with being, well, white and Christian. Let the social engineering begin.

let me get this straight. jews are demanding christians restrain or adjust their social mores and then demand others accept theirs...pretty soon they will be suing to remove the christmas tree while simultaneously demanind a menorah be erected.

"In the 21st Century, Jewish Studies is perhaps the most understudied field of knowledge relative to its importance in understanding how the contemporary world works"

Hear hear! Great post dude.

The other day I'm watching a Don Rickles hosted roast of then Governor Ronald Reagan from 1970 or so, possibly before I was born. It was your typical roast featuring a nasty, meanspirited Jew insulting non-Jews as a form of humor, and Dean Martin drinking and smoking, but there was one point where Rickles says as an aside something like "Nobody gets elected unless MY PEOPLE give the thumbs up!"

So we've got at least one instance of a Jew admitting - bragging - in a high profile event featuring elected politicians that Jews effectively control American politics, and my thoughts upon witnessing it ran along the lines of "The elder generation knows, and has known for a long time, that the Jews run America."

So is it really the most under-studied field of knowledge? Or the most deliberately ignored? Would it really come as a big surprise to the average American that Jews run the media, Hollywood, and politics? Does that really require further study and dissemination?

My favourite Jews Run America story:"JERUSALEM (AFP) — US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was left shame-faced after President George W. Bush ordered her to abstain in a key UN vote on the Gaza war, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said on Monday.

"She was left shamed. A resolution that she prepared and arranged, and in the end she did not vote in favour," Olmert said in a speech in the southern town of Ashkelon.

The UN Security Council passed a resolution last Thursday calling for an immediate ceasefire in the three-week-old conflict in the Gaza Strip and an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza where hundreds have been killed.

Fourteen of the council's 15 members voted in favour of the resolution, which was later rejected by both Israel and Hamas.

The United States, Israel's main ally, had initially been expected to voted in line with the other 14 but Rice later became the sole abstention.

"In the night between Thursday and Friday, when the secretary of state wanted to lead the vote on a ceasefire at the Security Council, we did not want her to vote in favour," Olmert said.

"I said 'get me President Bush on the phone'. They said he was in the middle of giving a speech in Philadelphia. I said I didn't care. 'I need to talk to him now'. He got off the podium and spoke to me.

"I told him the United States could not vote in favour. It cannot vote in favour of such a resolution. He immediately called the secretary of state and told her not to vote in favour."

Sovereign states manage their own foreign affairs. America does not manage its own foreign affairs, ergo it is not a sovereign state.

Its status is akin to that of the Commonwealth Dominions in the early 20th Century, when the UK would declare war on behalf of Canada and others and direct their foreign policy. Less delicately, America is Israel's bitch.

It sounds like the first book, without actually saying it, reports Walmart re-discovers, like the US Army before, that diversity in ethnicity is OK so long as standards of IQ and diligence are maintained a monoculture. In contrast, Tyson re-discovers, like urban residents before, diversity in IQ and diligence is a guarantee for civil acrimony.

In the 21st Century, Jewish Studies is perhaps the most understudied field of knowledge relative to its importance in understanding how the contemporary world worksDespite the existence of many professors of Jewish Studies!

Pathetic. Even nauseating. American Jews don't even know what they are. They have no real faith except to be a bloody social nuisance. I think, though, that Sailer is wrong in concluding that Jews need to be studied to understand how the contemporary world works. It is not Jews but Protestants who need to be studied. Indeed, the masochistic self-destructive impulse of WASPs has nothing to do with Jews. The changes that took place in America in the 1960s also took place in Canada in the same decade, and they involved left-wing WASPs seeking to appease annoying French Catholics in Quebec.

As a graduate student at Cambridge UK I have found that amongst the American students at the university the Jews tend to be divided between pinko nitwits and quite funny politically cynical types; it is the Ivy League WASPs who are simply insufferable in their holier-than-thou sanctimony and political correctness, which seems to be a perversion of Protestant politeness.

Interesting, but is this an assertion of Jewishness qua Jewishness, or Jewishness qua blue state cosmopolitanism? Would a similar number of Jews react the same way if transplanted to an all-Christian town in Massachusetts, for example?

For some reason I have the nagging feeling that a certain Scotch-Irishman is going to show up in this thread and explain everything in this post away by pointing to contemporary female mating patterns and show us how it can be resolved by bombing Moslem goat herders half a world away......

"It's stories like this that you encounter all the time that make all those counterarguments that consist of, "Jews have assimilated into Protestant/Unitarian/Universalist culture and are just acting like Prods/Unitarians/Universalists" and "Kevin MacDonald is a crazy nut" seem, um, ineffectual."

Except that Bentonville isn't a Unitarian Universalist sort of place, is it? All white Protestants are not alike. Some are like most Jews: secular, liberal. Jews in Bentonville are probably attempting to reassert the secular liberalism in a way they wouldn't feel necessary in Chicago, New York, Los Angeles, etc.

*chuckles* And who says that we'd have to wait until humans landed on other planets before they started terraforming?

What amazes me is the cognitive dissonance that many Jews must have. As a minority surrounded by those not like themselves, they instinctively become more aggressive and more strident about their own identity and interests. Why would they expect that any other group would do otherwise when forced to live among many others not like themselves?

What is wrong with asking people to schedule PTA meetings on nights that don't conflict with anyone's once-a-year holidays? How is that an "airing of grievances", or even an inconvenience to anyone? It hardly sounds as though these people are demanding that the surrounding Christians radically change their way of life.

Changing the days of PTA meetings and the name of the winter holidays and putting - gasp! - a menorah in the town square: these are radical societal shakeups that only pushy Jews would be capable of effecting.

As for the names, they are unusual, but Jewish folks have intermarried* and changed their names just like other ethnic groups.*the latter a bit less than other groups for the simple reason of being a different religion.

Where I differ from MacDonald etc. is that while their analysis may apply to Jewish politicians, pundits, bankers/CEOs, and Hollywood bigshots (it probably does in part, even though I can find plenty of dubious behavior from similarly situated Gentiles) I don't think it applies to the majority of Jews in this country.

I would have thought Winchester was a WASP nameyeah so is stuart, stewart, wallace, grant, greene, darlymple, brown, etc... sometimes they even try to make them look more waspy by adding an archaic e like richard "holbrooke'

By the way, you don't think there might have been an element of, you know, humor in Rickles' remark? He is, after all, a comedian.

It's funny how you take such braggadoccio soooo seriously. It illustrates a principle Guy White sometimes refers to. Anti-semites assume Jews are fundamentally dishonest, yet whenever a Jew - any Jew, even a Rat Pack comedian - says something they perceive as damning to the Jews, they take it as the gospel truth.

Jews are essentially irrelevant to culture clashes between Christians and non-Christians, it is MUSLIMS who create and provide the most tensions.

Fear of offending Muslims has led most of England to essentially ban Christmas, including renaming them "Holiday Lights" and "Holiday Trees" and banning "Merry Christmas."

Muslims don't complain to the PTA, they blow people up. Or otherwise kill them -- death threats (utterly believable) by Muslims against holiday performances of Mozart and Verdi operas in Austria, Switzerland, and Germany caused their cancellations.

One need look at the Obama Administration, which has basically done the minimum in celebrating Christmas, to see how Muslims react to Christian holidays. To be fair, Feminists don't like Christmas (too much Christ in it) either. Much of the anti-Christmas sentiment (a girl sent home with a "violent" drawing of Christ crucified) in the schools is due to their feminized and Feminist nature.

The group most opposed to public expressions of Christianity, Christmas, and so on are not Jews. Rather Muslims, who tend to kill people when they don't get their way.

As Glen Reynolds observed, this rewards whatever group uses VIOLENCE or the believable threat of it (requiring past extreme violence) in controlling the public square. I don't recall Jews shooting Priests and Nuns over whatever the Pope said or Danish cartoons but I do recall Muslims doing that exact thing.

Changing the days of PTA meetings and the name of the winter holidays and putting - gasp! - a menorah in the town square: these are radical societal shakeups that only pushy Jews would be capable of effecting.

Yeah, it might seem like nothing to you - something that can be just brushed aside by some sarcastic, snarky aside.

...the number of Jews in Benton County, population 203,107, remains tiny: the synagogue had about 100 members in 2006 that is, O.05% of the population. Obviously, most people will never meet a Jew and if they do (Tom Douglass, Scott Winchester) they will not know they have met one. I cant imagine they are making such an impact as to merit this long and detailed study. Why this intense focus on Jews?

"Fear of offending Muslims has led most of England to essentially ban Christmas, including renaming them "Holiday Lights" and "Holiday Trees" and banning "Merry Christmas."

Maybe, but let's be honest and admit that most of the anti-Christmas agitators in America are probably secular or atheist Jews. No, they're not blowing anyone up, but their zero tolerance policy toward displays of Christianity is unfair an unwarranted.

By the way, you don't think there might have been an element of, you know, humor in Rickles' remark? He is, after all, a comedian."

When I was younger, I always thought that Rickles was an annoying prick. As I've gotten older, I've rather come to like him. He was a patriotic American (WWII Navy vet), and he could be rather funny - in a coarse way to be sure, but not obscenely raunchy like, say, Buddy Hackett. Also, Rickles said nasty things about celbrities. What could be more truthful than that?

I wonder if Jews are more likely than other groups of people to migrate to an area for economic reasons. And if this could be quantified.

My instinctive response, although this could be disproved through research, is to say, "no." I think the vast majority of migration among all groups is economic (job seeking), based on personal observation.

Most Hindus are pratical enough that they'll assimilate to the traditions of whatever community they live in. I don't expect them to convert en masse to Christianity, but I'd wager that the Hindus of Bentonville are not trying to cause waves. For the most part, their main goal is to make money, educate the kids, and fit in.

"Jewish families have become increasingly vocal proponents of religious neutrality in the county. They have asked school principals to rename Christmas vacation as winter break (many have) and lobbied the mayor's office to put a menorah on the town square (it did)."

Why do American Jews do this, when British Jews don't? Why are they so hostile to their host culture? Is it because British Jews are mostly much more religious, while secular American Jews can only feel Jewish by attacking Christianity?

We do get attacks on Christmas here in the UK, mostly by white secular leftist atheist-gentiles running local councils (govts) who read about it happening in the US and feel they ought to do it too. Muslims, including Islamists, have shown no interest in attacking Xmas, and I can't think of any Jews who have, not even leftist intelligentsia. Yet in the US Jewish hostility to Christianity and its festivals is palpable.

Apart from the secularism of US Jews, and the aggressive, hostile nature of New York culture in general, another possible factor is the (partly Deist-inspired) religious neutrality of the US Constitution. A Constitution for a Christian nation, religiously neutral to avoid the Christian-vs-Christian conflict that had wracked Europe at least since the Reformation. Does Jewish legalism impel US Jews to grab that neutrality, twist it into "separation of church and state", and start demanding equal esteem?

If so, it seems a tragedy to me - for the Christian majority of course, but also for the Jewish activists destroying the host culture that has been the most welcoming in history to Jews and Jewish aspirations. Here in Europe we have leftist secularism, anti-Christianity, a huge and fast growing Muslim populatiom - and Jews are increasingly physically endangered, they and their places of worship attacked by Muslim thugs, viscerally anti-Israel leftist governments and broadcast media. Here in the UK there's a warrant out for the arrest of Zippy Livni, however you spell it, on "war crimes" charges. Israeli govt officials can't visit without fear of arrest. Jewish companies are routinely boycotted.

If the US anti-Christian Jews actually get their way, it seems to me that the results will be similar. They need to be ignored, their demands consistently rejected. For the sake of US Jews as well as Christians.

Whiskey:"Fear of offending Muslims has led most of England to essentially ban Christmas, including renaming them "Holiday Lights" and "Holiday Trees" and banning "Merry Christmas.""

Except that UK Muslims, for all their very many faults, have never claimed to be offended by Xmas or demanded its removal. The people who actually implement these policies may *claim* they're afraid of Muslims, but that's not why they do it. They are secular anti-Christian leftists, normally indigenous post-Christian whites. Some are Marxist, others just left-liberal. Around half the Conservative party is now left-liberal, IME, and the other two big parties entirely left-liberal, shading into Stalinist or Trotskyite.

Maybe, but let's be honest and admit that most of the anti-Christmas agitators in America are probably secular or atheist Jews. No, they're not blowing anyone up, but their zero tolerance policy toward displays of Christianity is unfair an unwarranted.

Look, I'm one of those secularist "anti-Christmas" agitators and I'm not Jewish. The only opposition to Christmas I have is when it's endorsed or specially privileged by government entities (including public schools). That's not the same thing as being hostile or having "zero tolerance" of Christianity.

Not even Abe Foxman wants Christmas displays removed from religious entities like churches or private homes. So it's disingenuous in the extreme to claim that opposing Christianity's privileged and (until recently) solo position in public schools or government buildings is somehow "hostile" or "intolerant".

The Jews of Bentonville here are not being pushy or hostile to their "host culture". They are just asking for neutrality. As one commenter noted, how earth-shattering is it to ask people to reschedule a PTA meeting or to put a menorah in the town square at Hanukkah? Answer: it's not. These are perfectly reasonable requests.

One Jewish lady in the article didn't like her kid being given a picture of Jesus at school to color in. OK, so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in? Just how tolerant would you be?

Traditionally Muslims are more pro-Christmas than Jews. In Islam Christ is revered as an important prophet, just not the son of God. In Judaism Christ is simply viewed as a fraud. At least in America, I don't ever remember Muslims complaining about Christmas. And we're not inundated with stories about Ramadan in the media in the US, but we do get a daily barrage about Hanukkah. The Boston Globe and the NYT are constantly publishing whiny self-pitying confessionals about how hard it is to grow up Jewish in America at Christmastime and feel "excluded."

Whiskey:"Jews are essentially irrelevant to culture clashes between Christians and non-Christians, it is MUSLIMS who create and provide the most tensions..."

Muslims care about 'insults' to Allah and Mohammed. The Wahabbis in Saudi Arabia may ban Xmas and Bibles, but we've seen no sign of that in the UK yet.

I'm reminded that in my wife's London office, there is one Muslim, a woman. The English dhimmicrats, leftist agnostics, all display exaggerated solicitude and 'respect' for her beliefs, eg donning headscarves in 'solidarity'. My wife is a redneck from the US South, and refused to do this.

Although my wife is actually technically atheist, like the English lefties, the Muslim quite often _asks her for religious advice_ - because she has the religious mindset, and there is a degree of mutual respect that she sticks to her beliefs, as with refusing to wear the hijab. Whereas this Muslim, and most IME, cordially despise the lefties who 'celebrate diversity' while having zero understanding or interest in what religion actually means to its adherents.

Muslims are not good for a Christian country, and should not be allowed in in significant numbers, but they do get along much better with similarly religious Christians than they do with post-Christian secularists. In the American context, "Red Staters" with their religion, (slight) ethnocentrism, and patriotism are much more akin to the rest of the world than are the "Blue State" SWPLers, and tend to get along with them much better. The SWPLers connect to the deracinated urban(e) elites, but in most countries those are a tiny fraction of 1% of the population - and are STILL mostly far more patriotic and conservative than US or European left-liberals.

There must be non-Jews living in Israel. To what extent do the Israeli Jews accommodate non-Jewish religious beliefs...if at all.

Sean

12/15/2009

I lived in Haifa Israel ealy in the 90s. Not sure of percentages, but there is a large Christian Arab population and Christmas was in evidence, in a singularly middle-eastern way. They had a truck with a loud speaker that usually sold fruit in the street. Around Christmas this truck was equipped with a skinny Santa in a red and white Santa suit handing out goodies to the kids. Nobdy interfered with Christmas in Haifa. But then that town was known for harmonious relations between Jews and Arabs, but I guess part of the reason was that Muslim Arabs were very few. Most were Christian and fare better under a Jewish government than a Muslim government.

PuffsPlus:" So it's disingenuous in the extreme to claim that opposing Christianity's privileged and (until recently) solo position in public schools or government buildings is somehow "hostile" or "intolerant".

It's hostile and intolerant to Christianity's central role in the national culture.

If I lived in India, no I would not object to my child bringing home colour-in pictures of Ganesha (a deity for whom I have considerable affection). Hell, living in a Tamil area of London, I don't mind if they teach about Ganesha in school, long as they still have a Christmas tree too. It was kinda cool how they made a half-assed attempt to celebrate Thanksgiving on account of my son being half-American.

But as long as the majority population are Christian or post-Christian, the public culture should stay Christian. If the majority population is replaced, then Bentonville has bigger problems to worry about.

I guess what it comes down to is that, as an atheist, I would like to take a stick and beat my fellow American atheists, of whatever religious heritage, over the head until they see some sense.

The family did not attend a synagogue in Chicago because, Mrs. Rosen said, "you didn't need a synagogue to have a Jewish identity." There were Jewish neighbors, Jewish friends, Jewish family.But not in Bentonville, where her daughter brought home from day care a picture of Jesus to color in. Suddenly, a synagogue did not seem like a luxury anymore, but a necessity to preserve her family's Jewish heritage.

This reminds me of a comment by a 19th Century British traveler quoted in an article in the '90's on the topic of the Balkans and their wars: "The true religion of Albania is Albanianism"

Traditionally Muslims are more pro-Christmas than Jews. In Islam Christ is revered as an important prophet, just not the son of God. In Judaism Christ is simply viewed as a fraud. At least in America, I don't ever remember Muslims complaining about Christmas. And we're not inundated with stories about Ramadan in the media in the US, but we do get a daily barrage about Hanukkah. The Boston Globe and the NYT are constantly publishing whiny self-pitying confessionals about how hard it is to grow up Jewish in America at Christmastime and feel "excluded."

I'm a life-long atheist/agnostic, but I was watching Steven Colbert's show last night and I could't help wondering why would a guy who claims to be a devout (i.e. believing Christian-Catholic) spend so much of his time ridiculing his own faith--and not just its excesses but its fundamental tenets? I remember Terry Gross asked him about his Catholicism--the idea being she couldn't believe he believed. You could almost hear her thoughts: But I thought you were one of the smart goys!

It probably has to do with the idea that the first amendment requires state secularism, vs. the idea that the Church of England is a national church and thus an integral part of English culture (in a way that America's historic majority Protestantism isn't).

John:"It probably has to do with the idea that the first amendment requires state secularism"

But where does this idea, the idea that no-federal-State-church + no-federal-prohibition-on-free-exercise = required state secularism come from? Did it come from secular gentiles, then get piggybacked by secular (ie non-believing) Jews? Serious attacks on Christianity's privileged position in a mostly Christian nation seem to be a recent phenomenon, post-50s. The Culture of Critique seems to have been influential, from what I can tell.

It doesn't seem like something that an originalist reading of the document could possibly come up with, anyway. Of course Liberalism does have its own dynamic, I think Larry Auster has done some impressive analysis in explaining how this works. Roosevelt and co had no problem with Christianity, but they did need to get rid of originalism to get their social-democrat political program through. Then the next generation of liberals in the '60s pick up the tools left them, and use them to carry the project on its logical course. And again in the '80s, and today. On this approach many Jews may just be unthinking Liberals, or victims of Liberal memes (some originated by gentiles), and be acting in ways very much against their own group long-term interests.

Anyway, I think the existence pf the state Anglican church in the UK has been important. It makes the multiculturalist 'war on Christmas' here seem on its face much more radical than in the US, where many moderates think it inherently reasonable and even Constitutionally mandated that all religions enjoy parity of esteem, and none a 'priviliged position'.

@ Simon: But where does this idea, the idea that no-federal-State-church + no-federal-prohibition-on-free-exercise = required state secularism come from?

Don't get me wrong (although I could have explained myself better): I certainly don't believe that the first amendment requires state secularism (as laïcité is required in France, for ex.). It's just easy enough to interpret the 1A that way, if you are of the ACLU/Madalyn O'Hair mindset.

OK, so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in? Just how tolerant would you be?

Well, normal, secular Christians would just go "Please don't do this thing", rather than trying to evangelize and become more strident in promoting a religion that they didn't really follow that intensely.

However, I wonder if a confound here is that the "people of faith have an easy time understanding and accepting one another, including people who belong to different religious traditions, because they share a respect for religious belief". It might be that the Jews in this community are becoming (or at least purporting to become) more religious because that area respects religious communities and would not respond as well to secularism. That is, the intensity of their affirmation of Judaism is simply a stalking horse for their true secularism.

Bentonville clearly shows the direction of causality in the relationship between economic growth and diversity.

Jews and Hindoos did not move to Bentonville and make it wealthy. Whites made wealth, the diversity followed. We still don't know if the diversities, even the smarts among them, can make wealth by themselves.

Rectum1man, as smart as you think you are, you should nail formatting. How do Hindoos in India respond to Christians building churches there? The Christians there are almost entirely natives, whereas pagans in America are almost all aliens.

Jews and Muslims of similar a level of orthodoxy are basically identical, except that the Orthodox Jews can't really deal with non-Jews except by telling them to shut up like the unchosen furniture they are while Orthodox Muslims want you to believe what they believe but have an elaborate system of second class citizenship if you don't. Otherwise, it's the same women oppressing, public stoning, rule by feuding tendentious scholars of obscure matters bs.

The relevant parameters between Jews and Muslims are orthodoxy and HBD.

Adjusted for those, I would definitely prefer to live amongst Muslims than Jews, but the reality is that there is and will be no such adjustment.

Jews and Muslims of similar a level of orthodoxy are basically identical

Well, of course. That's because Judaism and Islam are essentially the same religion, the latter merely being a universalist/non-race-based extension of the former. Given the current Mid East conflict and its ideological consequences elsewhere, this is seldom realized, but very obvious when you pay a little attention.

Among other things, I think Muhammed originally claimed to be a Jewish prophet, in the Old Testament style, and Islam was established as a separate religion only when the existing Jews refused to recognize this.

Very simply, if you take the 20-odd most prominent religions around the world and plot their doctrines, dogmas, and characteristics on a multi-dimensional space, Islam and Judaism would be by far the closest, probably closer in some respects than different Christian sects. In fact, Jews in China were traditionally called "Muslims of the Blue Cap" or something, because the Chinese couldn't tell the religions apart.

I called on both Tyson and Wal-Mart in the 80s and early 90s. Both brought prosperity to NW Arkansas and bordering regions. I can't characterize the relative religiosity of the locals, but I can say that almost everyone was extraordinarily careful not to kill the golden geese, and rightly so. Assimilation is a little easier if you're prosperous and the outsiders are contributiing to your prosperity.

That said, I found the Arkansans--away from work--to be genial and easy to get along with. As Steve noted above, though, the managers I called on were hard asses at work.

My bottom line, while culture and tribe are undeniably important the tribes of Sam and Don ruled.

"Obviously, most people will never meet a Jew and if they do (Tom Douglass, Scott Winchester) they will not know they have met one. I cant imagine they are making such an impact as to merit this long and detailed study. Why this intense focus on Jews?"

Did you read the article?

"Not everyone is ordering the knishes, but Christians THROUGHOUT Benton County are slowly learning the complexities of Jewish life. Gary Compton, the superintendent of schools in Bentonville and a member of a Methodist church in town, has learned NOT TO SCHEDULE PTA meetings the night before JEWISH holidays"

When those 100 Jews demand to have PTA meetings changed for the whole school district and the Christians THROUGHOUT the county are having to deal with Jewish life complexities, then, unsurprisingly, the Jews get noticed. THAT's why the focus. Because the Jews called attention to THEMSELVES.

Talk about a strawman. The Jews of Bentonville aren't trying to ban any public celebration of any such thing.

I don't mind if they teach about Ganesha in school, long as they still have a Christmas tree too.

So if the Jews just want a menorah added to the Christmas displays, how is that any different?

Well, normal, secular Christians would just go "Please don't do this thing", rather than trying to evangelize and become more strident in promoting a religion that they didn't really follow that intensely.

The Jews are evangelizing? And there are plenty of people who grew up in lukewarm Christian homes who later rediscovered Jeeyzus as adults and became stridently "born again". And even worse, they evangelize everyone, not just other born agains. Give me some strident Jews any day over strident Southern Baptists.

I guess what it comes down to is that, as an atheist, I would like to take a stick and beat my fellow American atheists, of whatever religious heritage, over the head until they see some sense.

What makes sense is having the government and public spaces stay religiously neutral. Which is exactly what the Constitution in the US mandates, so that all works out nicely.

I am not Jewish but I can certainly sympathize with the Bentonville Jews. Christianity as practiced in the American south is often hostile to freethinkers and atheists. I wouldn't want my kid to bring home a picture of Jesus to color in either. Or to have school time taken used for sectarian prayer rallies, have to pray with the coach to Jesus in order to be on a football team, etc.

As for me, my Christmas is all the more merrier for being Christless. And yes, I like saying "Seasons' Greetings" and "Happy Holidays".

OK, so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in? Just how tolerant would you be?the old multicult hustle- make america more diverse then use the diversity against us.we wouldn't even have to consider coloring in mohammed or ganesh if it weren't for multicult in the first place.

Doctrinally, Islam is actually a lot closer to Christianity than Judaism. Islam considers Christianity a successor religion to Judaism, and Islam a successor religion to Christianity. I.e., the prophets' revelations to the Jews were true, but then Jesus came and gave the revised, more accurate version; then Mohamed gave the second, more accurate revision.

That's why Christmas isn't threatening to Muslims, as another commenter noted -- they believe Jesus was a prophet too, and asserting belief in Christianity doesn't implicitly refute Islam. Muslims are far less tolerant to Baha'i, who consider their religion to be a successor religion to Islam.

In practice though, the behavior of Orthodox Jews is far different from that of devout Muslims. Jews have a much longer history of being a religious minority, so Orthodox Jews tend to be more insular. They gravitate to small communities, send their kids to their own schools, etc. Muslims have a long history of conquest and being in the majority in their countries, so they are more inclined to want expressions of their religion in the public square (foot baths, minarets, etc.).

It probably has to do with the idea that the first amendment requires state secularism,...."

No, it does not! This is a willfully ignorant reading of the meaning of the constitution, untethered to any understanding of the historical traditions of this nation. At the time the constitution was adopted, many states had official churches.

> turned this sedate rural community into a teeming mini-metropolis populated by Hindus, Muslims and Jews. <

> a segment of the white Christian majority, which sees its comfortable, all-white way of life fading <

Nope, no racial competition or aggression involved here. Move along.

> "You have to try harder to be Jewish down here." <

Ah, assimilation!

> presentation about Hanukkah to his son's kindergarten class. The lesson, complete with an explanation of how to play with a spinning dreidel and compete for chocolate coins, imported from New York, proved so popular that the school's librarian taped it for future classes....Not everyone is ordering the knishes, but Christians throughout Benton County are slowly learning the complexities of Jewish life. Gary Compton, the superintendent of schools in Bentonville and a member of a Methodist church in town, has learned not to schedule PTA meetings the night before Jewish holidays, which begin at sundown, and has encouraged the high school choir to incorporate Jewish songs into a largely Christian lineup. "We need to get better at some things," he said. "You just don't go from being noninclusive to being inclusive overnight." <

"Christianity as practiced in the American south is often hostile to freethinkers and atheists."

Fair enough, so don't go there if those traditions irk you. If a Southern Baptist moved into my secular neighborhood I'd expect him to lay low and not impose himself on our traditions. If I moved to Arkansas I would show my new neighbors the same courtesy.

Shame on Steve for changing this post to use more loaded and incendiary language.

You know, once upon a time in Rome, Christians were the ones who refused to assimilate and were persecuted for it. Were the Romans justified in putting Christians to death because Christians refused to make obeisances or prayers or sacrifices to pagan idols or to celebrate pagan holidays? Should the Christians have just gone with the flow and imitated the majority religious culture?

I thought the whole point of Christianity was the "do unto others" bit.

"OK, so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in? Just how tolerant would you be?"

If I had chosen to live in India, I would not expect Hindus to change their practices to protect my passive agressive, hysterical sensibilities. But I don't think color in pics of the prophet would probably come up in a Muslim land.

One Jewish lady in the article didn't like her kid being given a picture of Jesus at school to color in. OK, so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in? Just how tolerant would you be?

If you're asking if I'd move to Bangkok, put my kid in a Thai public school, and get my hackles up if he came home with a Buddha coloring book, to the extent that I'd wind up agitating the Thais to have Buddha coloring books removed from the school, then the answer is an emphatic "no". I have a conscience, a sense of propriety, and manners.

I think a good place to start from in interethnic relations is reciprocity.

Do Jews put up with this kind of shit from non-Jews in Israel? That would be the kind of question I'd be asking, in looking for a starting point. Crucifix in Tel Aviv town square for Christmas?

What makes sense is having the government and public spaces stay religiously neutral. Which is exactly what the Constitution in the US mandates, so that all works out nicely.

Then you should be up in arms over all the religious holidays for federal employees. Foot in the door and all that. And all those Jewish holidays for Congress (more of them than the Christian holidays last time I checked) must have you livid.

I don't see how "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion" translates into "government and public spaces must be religiously neutral." Seems to me, it's just saying Congress isn't allowed to stick it's big fat nose into our religious affairs. From there, we get a ban on states or local governments putting up Christmas trees?

Which is exactly what the Constitution in the US mandates, so that all works out nicely.yeah that's why congress has had a chaplin for 200+years show me in the constitution where this is mandated...(its a trick question, you can't )

January 1, 1996... Two hundred thousand clergy were systematically slain under Soviet rule in a horrific cycle of crucifixions, scalpings and "bestial tortures," the Russian Presidential Commission said November 27...

The amount of paranoid judeophobia I see in this blog is disgusting. The next thing you morons will do is to start blaming Jews and Israel for all of the problems in the world today. I've learned to expect this from you people.

You are all probably great fans of Hitlery Roddamn KKKlinton and also voted for Obama for president. Too bad you won't wake up in time to realize that you need to ally with Jews against the REAL enemies of the U.S. which are the left wing, commie liberals and the Mohammetans who have been murdering white people of European descent for centuries and are taking over the world and trying to kill us because they hate our freedom.

I wonder how much of the Left's special animosity toward Wal-Mart is based on Jewish jealousy. That one of the most successful hustlers ever -- Sam Walton -- was a gentile, must really be irksome.

I have a slightly different theory about that - I believe that the Jews invested an enormous amount of energy in the 1930s [and onwards] in setting up a legalistic framework within which they could prosper as rent-seeking middlemen - for instance, FDR and the Democrat Congress rewarded the patronage of the various Mafias - Jewish, Irish (Joe Kennedy), and Italian - by abolishing the 18th Amendment and by replacing it with the 21st Amendment, which created the Three-Tier System and thereby institutionalized the various Mafias as rent-seeking entities protected by the full faith and credit of the US Government and its taxpayers*.

Anyway, I think that the Jews hate Sam Walton so fiercely because he obliterated so many rent-seeking alliances and allowed manufacturers to sell directly [or at least almost directly] to end-users.

On the other hand, as you indicate, Sam Walton is [or was] himself a middleman, and [again, as you indicate] there is certainly no upper bound on the vitriol and venom to which the Shkotzim will be subjected when they dare to tread on Chosen turf.

*Back in October 1999, the Wall Street Journal ran a couple of dynamite articles, by Alix M. Freedman and John R. Emshwiller, about the nation's largest alcohol distributor, Southern Wine & Spirits, of Miami, Florida, and how it is run by the remnants of the old Meyer Lansky gang. Their [post-Lansky] leader was a Jewish mobster, named Al Malnik, whose attorney and consigliere, Richard Ben-Veniste, managed to weasel his way onto both the Senate Whitewater Committee and the joint 9-11 Commission.

Oh, and Apocalypto [modulo one kinda artifically-forced subplot which is a cross between the pit scene in The Village and the drowning scene in the recent remake of Casino Royale] is one whale of a compelling movie.

The picture of Jesus to be colored in was given out by a DAYCARE, not a school. I live in Arkansas, and there are no public preschools or daycares in Arkansas that I am aware of, other than Head Start, etc., and I doubt the Wal-Mart Jews are patronizing those.

If the daycare is owned and operated by Christians, it is no surprise that Jesus is part of the daily program.

PuffsPlus: You know, once upon a time in Rome, Christians were the ones who refused to assimilate and were persecuted for it. Were the Romans justified in putting Christians to death because Christians refused to make obeisances or prayers or sacrifices to pagan idols or to celebrate pagan holidays?

So now asking minorities to integrate or accept the majority culture in public space is the equivalent of slaughtering them!

Should the Christians have just gone with the flow and imitated the majority religious culture?

From a Roman pagan standpoint it would probably have worked out better for them.

I thought the whole point of Christianity was the "do unto others" bit.

That's even worse than confusing a crucifix with a cross.

whiskey: Jews are essentially irrelevant to culture clashes between Christians and non-Christians, it is MUSLIMS who create and provide the most tensions.

Yup. The Muslim ACLU, Muslim ADL, Muslim Hollywood, and Muslim corporate media are relentless in their war against the prophet Jesus.

Simon: Why do American Jews do this, when British Jews don't? Why are they so hostile to their host culture? Is it because British Jews are mostly much more religious, while secular American Jews can only feel Jewish by attacking Christianity?

British Jewish groups may not go after Christianity as much in the UK because they don't feel they need to. But they've certainly gone after the host culture through 'hate speech' laws and more recently the Board of Jewish Deputies campaign against the BNP.

Incidentally, the recent ruling against crucifixes in Italian public school classrooms was initially not supported by either the main Jewish or Muslim groups. I think that is because they know Italians are more likely to stand up for themselves.

"so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in?"

My son and daughter have been coming home with little bowls made in celebration of Diwali, paper Menorahs (which they have colored), and I have been sitting through that rubbish "Dreidel, Dreidel" song at what used to be called The Christmas Pageant, but is now Our Holiday Celebration, for ten years, and never once have I complained to their various schools, because I understand that everyone wants to feel included. Don't fucking lecture me.

Jews have written almost all the really fun Christmas songs (as opposed to the Gentile hymns, which tend to be somewhat dirge-like). I wish the tuneful among them would turn their attentions to their own holiday songs, because they've got hardly any, and they all suck.

Svigor:Then you should be up in arms over all the religious holidays for federal employees. Foot in the door and all that. And all those Jewish holidays for Congress (more of them than the Christian holidays last time I checked) must have you livid.

Actually, yes, I am upset that Christmas is a federal holiday, but then again, it's been pretty secularized in the US.

I'm not opposed to gov't employees getting religious holidays, as long as they are allowed some freedom as to which religious holidays they get to observe. Mandating all federal employees to observe Jewish or Christian holidays, for example, would be wrong.

Svigor:If you're asking if I'd move to Bangkok, put my kid in a Thai public school, and get my hackles up if he came home with a Buddha coloring book, to the extent that I'd wind up agitating the Thais to have Buddha coloring books removed from the school, then the answer is an emphatic "no". I have a conscience, a sense of propriety, and manners.

The woman did not say anything about demanding that pics of Jesus be removed from the daycare or school. She did say it made her aware of her own Jewish identity and the need to protect it and teach it to her kids.

Do Jews put up with this kind of shit from non-Jews in Israel? That would be the kind of question I'd be asking, in looking for a starting point. Crucifix in Tel Aviv town square for Christmas?

Israel is not a religiously neutral country by design the way that the US is, so your comparison is apples and oranges.

The Israeli gov't and official religious functions are also run by the crazy Jews, not the secular-to-mildly religious ones who overwhelmingly represent Judaism in the US. Even some religious Jews I know in the US hate how the Orthodox keep a monopoly on Israeli politics. They also hate the increasing political muscle of the Haredim, who are as noisome as any other type of religious fundamentalist.

Speaking of this subject, the Sam Walton philosophy was to sell American-made products at reasonable prices. His successor, David Glass (a notable Scots-Irish businessman) threw over this strategy and replaced it with the "buy the cheapest foreign-made goods strategy" and to hell with American workers. Perhaps Mr. Glass' tenure is the reason that so many Jews want to move to Bentonville.

Matra:So now asking minorities to integrate or accept the majority culture in public space is the equivalent of slaughtering them!

Strawman. I'm pointing out the typical Christian hypocrisy in praising the ancient Christians for their supposed courage in resisting the assimilation into the majority culture in public even when threatened with death or ruin.

Yet here Jews are resisting assimilation into the majority culture in public. Not on pain of death, usually (although there are exceptions: Mikey Weinstein and Mona Dobrich received death threats). But certainly on pain of rejection and resentment and the derision of certain non-Jews with a kneejerk persecution complex. "Changing water into whining" is how Bill Maher put it, I believe.

So, it seems that some here regard Jews resisting assimilation into public identification with majority culture and religious customs = Jews being pushy, divisive, evil, passively aggressive, and whiny.

But Christians doing the same damn thing? No, that was just *brave*, right?

Well, it seems a little peculiar that America, whose population is roughly 95% of Christian origin, is so strongly non-Christian in its official life and governmental structure.

Meanwhile, Israel, which is around 75% of Jewish origin, or just 50% if you include the Occupied West Bank, is absolutely, totally utterly Jewish in its official life and governmental structure.

The whole situation is extremely puzzling, even mysterious. What's even stranger is that until about 50-60 years ago, America was very Christian in its social structure, and had been so for almost its entire history.

The world is filled with so many mysteries, which even our finest minds will probably never be able to solve...

Anonymous:I have been sitting through that rubbish "Dreidel, Dreidel" song at what used to be called The Christmas Pageant, but is now Our Holiday Celebration, for ten years, and never once have I complained to their various schools, because I understand that everyone wants to feel included. Don't fucking lecture me.

Congratulations. You seem like one of the few enlightened types commenting on this thread, and no, my "fucking lecture" wasn't directed at people like you.

I should like to once again point out that nowhere did the woman say she complained about the color-in-the-Jesus picture. She said it made her want to protect her Jewish identity.

For the record, I also would disagree with someone trying to get all color-me-Jesuses banned from daycare for all children. But that's not what happened.

RKU:Well, it seems a little peculiar that America, whose population is roughly 95% of Christian origin, is so strongly non-Christian in its official life and governmental structure.

Meanwhile, Israel, which is around 75% of Jewish origin, or just 50% if you include the Occupied West Bank, is absolutely, totally utterly Jewish in its official life and governmental structure.

Not peculiar at all. The US Constitution is neutral toward religion (any and all sects). The Israeli constitution is not. Percentages of who believes what in the population do not affect the founding and governing laws of either country.

Do Jews put up with this kind of shit from non-Jews in Israel? That would be the kind of question I'd be asking, in looking for a starting point. Crucifix in Tel Aviv town square for Christmas?

Israel is not a religiously neutral country by design the way that the US is, so your comparison is apples and oranges.

The US isn't set up by design to be religiously neutral, either, so your premise falls over. Not to mention you're making an apples to apples comparison (governments), when I was talking about oranges (ethnicities). "Not cricket" won't do in inter-ethnic warfare.

The Israeli gov't and official religious functions are also run by the crazy Jews, not the secular-to-mildly religious ones who overwhelmingly represent Judaism in the US. Even some religious Jews I know in the US hate how the Orthodox keep a monopoly on Israeli politics. They also hate the increasing political muscle of the Haredim, who are as noisome as any other type of religious fundamentalist.

True or not, this is all neither here nor there. E.g., I think we should be treating Mexicans the way Mexicans treat us in Mexico, regardless of whether Mexicans are crying inside about it. Similarly, Israel is obviously our best example of how Jews treat others when they run the show. Why shouldn't we take a cue? I say if it's good enough for Jews, it's good enough for me, too.

What about the Wiccans? Have they been dealt with fairly and give a seat at this ecumenical table? Or have they been given short shrift, as always. I guess only Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, etc, are worthy of concern, everyone else being of no importance. It's just not fair.

Puffs, who gives a rat's ass if the example is hypothetical or actual? Okay, so the Jeebus coloring book is hypothetical, the point stands. I would not move to a place with a culture distinct from mine and start trying to mold it to my desires, not under the aegis of "making them live up to how I interpret their Constitution," or otherwise. As I said, I have a sense of propriety, and manners.

"I have been sitting through that rubbish "Dreidel, Dreidel" song at what used to be called The Christmas Pageant, but is now Our Holiday Celebration, for ten years, and never once have I complained to their various schools, because I understand that everyone wants to feel included. Don't fucking lecture me."

Congratulations. You seem like one of the few enlightened types commenting on this thread

See, there you go. He's enlightened 'cuz he changed to accommodate the other. That's not enlightenment, it's sappery. It's not inclusion, either.

Israel is not a religiously neutral country by design the way that the US is, so your comparison is apples and oranges.

The US became religiously neutral by judicial fiat. All the first amendment says is that the federal government can't establish an official church. Anything short of that is constitutional. Unless everybody had it wrong until the 50s and 60s when judges finally became smart and saw things in the words of the constitution that everybody else had missed for over a century.

So, it seems that some here regard Jews resisting assimilation into public identification with majority culture and religious customs = Jews being pushy, divisive, evil, passively aggressive, and whiny.

But Christians doing the same damn thing? No, that was just *brave*, right?

Jews can be as brave as they want. Muslim suicide bombers are brave. The assault on the American culture is the point, not the qualities that the outsiders may or may not have.

Rosen's narrative is a great example of how unsatisfactory Auster's position is on Jews.

Auster holds that Jews can only be condemned as Jews when they attempt to advance liberal and anti-white positions as Jews. In effect this means that Jews may behave as Jews without condemnation so long as they don't explicitly state that Jewishness colors their attitudes.

If Rosen acts in the manner of a shtetl-dweller cast among the peasantry, this cannot be noted without risk of Auster decrying the observation as antisemitism. Rosen can only be condemned as a liberal until and unless Rosen herself concedes ethnic motivations. We may freely speculate about the unspoken motives of liberals, Muslims, blacks, and many others, but never Jews.

(WHAS11) - Instead of ho ho ho, it's no no no. No decorations that is.

The Adcock family has until Friday to remove everything out of their front lawn in the Shadowood town homes located near Wesport Road in Louisville.

They say it's a Christmas in crisis, first for them since they've lived there for 20 years.It’s an inflatable winter wonderland in Mark and Rebecca Adcock's front lawn, decorated with a Christmas theme.

It includes Santa Claus, a snowman and even a nativity scene.

They've decorated for 15 years.

They say now Mulloy Properties wants their lawn cleared out.

"We'll fight them all the way. We should be able to express Christmas however we feel," says Rebecca Adcock.

"At first they said a Jewish family complained. I asked and was told that by a lady," says Mark Adcock.

"I'm pointing out the typical Christian hypocrisy in praising the ancient Christians for their supposed courage in resisting the assimilation into the majority culture in public even when threatened with death or ruin."

We praise these Christians for their courage for "RESISTING THE ASSIMILATION INTO THE MAJORITY CULTURE"! How curiously it sounds that, according to you, they've been praised for nearly two millenia for a virtue that didn't become one until the 20th century.

Hate Christianity if you must, but throughout your comments, Christian "hypocrisies" are simply sins against this era's radical liberalism and have nothing to do with Christianity. Next, you'll call them hypocrites for saying God exists.

You do bring up one good point, though. Israel is not the religiously neutral country that the U.S. is. Why? Our neutrality can't be blamed on the Jews. And of course they're going to exploit this flaw, just as many other groups are doing! They're just the best at hastening our country's demise. Our founding fathers were way too idealistic and liberal; in the end, the more Reactionary Europe will come out ahead of the Anglosphere.

"I wish the tuneful among them would turn their attentions to their own holiday songs, because they've got hardly any, and they all suck."

Hannukah is a minor festival, only puffed up since it occurs around Christmastime, so not much effort has gone into Hannukah songs. More has gone into Passover songs, e.g., the mournful Zog Maran, or this modern, upbeat take on the classic Eliyahu Hanavi ("Eliyahu" is Hebrew for the prophet Elijah).

Since, over these years, there must be little clusters of Americans who, for business reasons, have lived in Hindu India. Are there any accounts of them demanding that Christian symbols be displayed anywhere except in their private homes? Has anyone demanded a Cross or a nativity scene be put up in public when their holidays come round? Or do they accept the notion of respecting the majority culture, when they are in the minority? There are many neighborhoods and communities in the U.S. where Jews are the dominant group, and one expects to see menorahs and other symbols of this fact.

Pushy Jews are like Ugly Americans. Ugly Americans go around the world expecting everyone to understand English and be hip to American culture. Pushy Jews go around America expecting white Americans to cater to Jewish demands. Ironically, Jews are the biggest critics of Ugly Americanism. Jews lecture us that we should respect the cultures and values of other nations when we visit them. Then, how come Jews don't feel the same way about Christianity? Or, maybe the problem isn't Christianity per se but the conservative nationalist kind more prevalent in the Sooouuth. You don't see many Jews complaining about some mainline progressive Christian church that allows gay ministers and promotes more immigration.

This is all very amusing(and sad)considering some of the best Christmas songs in the past were composed by Jews. And, some of the mostly popular pro-Christian movies--Ben Hur, for instance--was produced and directed by Jews.

Komment Kontrol - wake up! Half these posts are worse than all the ones of mine you've nixed in the past.

Unless the LIFO stack is acting up again, all of my best posts to this thread were censored - the stuff about the Spanish Civil War and the 21st Amendment and the Senate Whitewater Committee and PM magazine and the SEIU.

All I managed to get approved was a little musing on whether or not Leonard DiCaprio was gay.

[BTW, is the term "rent-seeking" now considered to be unacceptably anti-semitic by the standards of this mainstream blog?]

Its a running joke related to Testing 99's stated ethnic identity as opposed to his perceived ethnic identiy. I dont want to spoil the joke by going into too much detail."

Yeah, I know it referred primarily to Testing/Whiskey(99)/Evil Neocon (ah, those were the days) - FWIW I'm happy to accept he's Scots-Irish if he says he is. I remember posting in the comments of Taki's when they had them, and being attacked by an anti-Semite who was convinced I was Jewish (and a neocon) because only Jews are called Simon, or my last name - both of which are typical English Protestant/Anglican middle class names, my paternal ancestry. Add just the right amount of Liberal Universalism to typical Scots-Irish Andrew-Jacksoniansm and you can easily get something that shades into Neoconnery; that's how the Republicans kept their 'base' onside through the 2004 election.

@Puffsplus:"PuffsPlus: You know, once upon a time in Rome, Christians were the ones who refused to assimilate and were persecuted for it. Were the Romans justified in putting Christians to death because Christians refused to make obeisances or prayers or sacrifices to pagan idols or to celebrate pagan holidays?

Should the Christians have just gone with the flow and imitated the majority religious culture?"

Um, Christians celebrate their martyrs because they believe they were *right*. Catholics don't canonise the Protestants burned to death by Bloody Mary. Courage in a bad cause may be worthy of respect, but not approval.

The point I made, way upthread, is that American Jews are wrong *by their own lights* to attack Christianity, it is against their own interests. It's against Christian interests too, of course, but I don't expect Jews to have regard for Christian interests at the expense of their own.

In the longer term, I strongly suspect that the destruction of Christianity in the West is also against the interests of gentile atheists like you and me; because destroying the Christianity leads to destroying the West too, as is happening rapidly here in Europe, and what is replacing the West will not be atheist-friendly.

But, mid-term, Jews are the canary in the coal mine because they are fewer in number, more identifiable, and hated much more viscerally by the successor peoples than are post-Christian atheists. Plus, here in Europe the atheist Left both (a) sacaralises the Holocaust and (b) joins with the Muslims in attacking Jews perceived as 'right wing' for supporting Israel.

I'm primaril interested in addressing self-interested American Jews, not American leftist gentile-atheists. What I want American Jews to understand is that, contrary to their apparent beliefs, they are much more in danger from a population of leftist gentile atheists than from a population of reliably philo-Semitic conservative gentile Christians.

Leftist gentile atheists are unstable. They do not stay pro-Jewish for very long. The black boots of the Antifa will be coming for you too.

I think you meant "chaplain", and actually the same framers who got the 1st amendment put into place opposed Congressional chaplains (wisely, IMHOproof of that, please? and if their opposition was not successful, then it would stand to reason that the majority of congress and the consensus did not intrepret the amendment that way. in fact NO ONE did until mass jewish immigration to this country. curiously, jews do not,on principle oppose the jewish state of israel - or push for these things in israel - they do consistently push for religously neutral (read anti christian) governments not only here but in europe as well where there is no separation of church and state - how do you explain the UK's new found anti-christmas/christian campaigns - they are the DIRECT of jewish influence.

so you seriously want christmas to not be a gov holiday.Are you ethnically Jewish?

Were the Romans justified in putting Christians to death because Christians refused to make obeisances or prayers or sacrifices to pagan idols or to celebrate pagan holidays? hey puffs, you forgot to add, while blaming the romans that jews, through the influence of Nero's wife, who was a something like madanna is today (quasi jewish through kabbalah) were largely responsible for the persecution of Christians..

but lets cut to the chase, the 'war' against Christmas and the alleged religious neutrality advocated by jews is soley directed at christanity - and its bases is not on a principle of separation of church and state, its basis is an ancient hatred of Christ that has been internalized and secularlized by people like alan dershowitzhttp://www.vdare.com/piatak/091211_christmas.htmccording to kabbala (Jewish mysticism), on the night on which ‘that man’—a Jewish euphemism for Jesus–was born, not even a trace of holiness is present . . . . For this reason, Nitel Night . . . is one of the few occasions when Hasidim refrain from Torah study. On this horrific night, they neither conduct weddings nor do they go to the mikveh (ritual bath)…” [For them, it's wholly unholy, by Shahar Ilan, December 24, 2004]

They also hate the increasing political muscle of the Haredim, who are as noisome as any other type of religious fundamentalist.but they don't hate how jews literally spit on christians in israel, they don't hate how israel is a jewish identity state, they don't hate that jews are first class citizens and everyone else is a second class citizen. they don't hate that israel is NOT multicultural .... meanwhile they aggressively campaign for the US and UK (and the rest of europe for that matter) to become 'religiously neutral' to the point of removing christmas from the public square.

you and nearly all jews continue to defend and support this behavior, which, in the eyes of gentiles is gross hypocrisy. i no longer wonder why jews are in perpetual conflict wherever they go.

One Jewish lady in the article didn't like her kid being given a picture of Jesus at school to color in. OK, so how many of you good Christians would welcome your public school kid being given a picture of Ganesh or Mohammed to color in?

EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US, under the circumstances. (Those circumstances being that we had chosen to live among members of another religion.)

> The woman did not say anything about demanding that pics of Jesus be removed from the daycare or school. <

Wanna bet? If not, the first step toward doing so is "being offended." No concrete demands at this stage, just noises (in a national newspaper...!) about how you are offended and - afraid. Threatened! Just like Marjorie Rosen is threatened by...well, just the existence of all those tref goyim, never mind they bend over backward to accomodate Jews (which only proves, if anything, they still have a long way to go).

I know the pattern by heart, and so do many others, and we are more sick of it than you can conceive of.

> So now asking minorities to integrate or accept the majority culture in public space is the equivalent of slaughtering them!

Strawman. <

It was your analogy.

> Shame on Steve for changing this post to use more loaded and incendiary language. <

What I want to know is, when will contruction begin on the Holocaust Museum there? When does the ADL begin classes in the schools there? Arkansas schoolchildren have much to learn about the evil inside them. Remember Emmett Till, Eichmann, and Boo Radley.

"Marcy Winchester, the mother of the synagogue's first bar mitzvah, said, "You have to try harder to be Jewish down here."...

I would have thought Winchester was a WASP name especially from my recollection of Major Charles Emerson Winchester III from MASH."

Yes, Winchester is a town in Hampshire. Famously associated with King Alfred since it was the capital of Wessex and then England for a time.

"Fear of offending Muslims has led most of England to essentially ban Christmas, including renaming them "Holiday Lights" and "Holiday Trees" and banning "Merry Christmas.""

Really? That's funny, because I live here and I didn't notice. Oh I read some stuff in newspapers that suggested as such, but not having Christmas? That's bad for business my man and if it's bad for the bizzle it's not good for the err... wizzle? (Sorry if my Americanish is poor today, but you all talk like Snoop Dogg right?)

"Interesting, but is this an assertion of Jewishness qua Jewishness, or Jewishness qua blue state cosmopolitanism?"

Southerners, in general have little enmity towards Jews or any of the others, they just have no use for Buddinskis. They hate that arrogant NE pushiness regardless of ethnicity/religion.

Memphis, TN has had a sizable population of Indians for over 30 years, and there has been nary a peep of complaint because they assimilate and make good neighbors. Loudmouths of all ethnicities from the NE that want to obnoxiously "fix" all the backwardness down here, are despised, by contrast.

The Phoenix area is getting a new Tolerance & Holocaust Museum. With AZ’s (and the U.S's) history and large Native American population I thought that a tolerance museum might highlight the NA genocide, the Navajo Long March, Japanese internment camps, etc., but no we need to a museum that mainly focuses on a genocide that occurred in Europe.

"With AZ’s (and the U.S's) history and large Native American population I thought that a tolerance museum might highlight the NA genocide, the Navajo Long March, Japanese internment camps, etc., but no we need to a museum that mainly focuses on a genocide that occurred in Europe."

I agree that it makes little sense for a Holocaust museum to be put in AZ (as it made little sense to put one in DC, for that matter). I'm going to make two guesses here though: 1) funds to build the museum came from private donors (as was the case with the DC museum, although it was built on land donated from the government); 2) Neither the Navajos nor the Japanese had much interest in building a museum (or at least ponying up for one).

For several months in 1985, Aurora Christians engaged in a public debate about the merits of the proposed Hindu temple, citing both theological and civic positions.

The first letter to the editor of the local newspaper came from Laurie Riggs, wife of the pastor of Union Congregational Church, located in neighboring North Aurora not far from the Hindu site. She offered a biblical warning: “I, for one, am frightened by the erection of temples to other gods. When Israel as a nation did that [in the Bible], God had to chasten and bring judgment upon their land and people.” Mrs. Riggs also voiced concern about the direction of the American nation: “Are we going to be proud of something that will again take us away from the religion on which this country was founded?”

Riggs’s husband, Rev. John Riggs, was interviewed for an article in the evangelical periodical, Christianity Today, a few years later. “Biblically oriented Christians in this community were naturally afraid of the propagation of a polytheistic faith in their community,”

Plans for the Sri Venkateswara temple came up for review by the Aurora City Council in May of 1985. A week before the hearing, Aurora resident Donna Kalita asked in a letter to the editor of the local newspaper, “Does Aurora want to be known as the ‘home of the largest Hindu temple in America,’ or as a ‘God-fearing little city in America?’” She adamantly opposed the presence of “a temple for gods other than the living God of Abraham, creator of all things.” The City Council hearing featured a stirring debate, representing what Mayor David Pierce later characterized as the best and the worst in Aurora’s citizenry. Christians took a variety of positions on the proposed Hindu temple and what it symbolized, which continued to play out in the local newspaper long after the Council approved the temple’s plans.

At least three positions can be identified among Christian participants in this public debate. The first two have already been intimated. One position, articulated by Laurie Riggs and Donna Kalita above, saw the presence of a Hindu temple in Aurora as contravening the will of God and biblical injunctions, and thus it should not be allowed by the citizens and public officials of the city. William W. Penn labeled City Council members non-Christians for “knowingly and willingly going against the Holy Bible” in making “a decision that will, if the temple is built, place Aurora in judgement according to God’s word.” Michael J. Mallette asked, “Is the God of the Bible the one, true God? If so, then we are facing a provoked, jealous, almighty God who has sworn to take vengeance on all disobedience. I, for one, fear that our city is standing on the threshold of a new and dreadful future.” In this view, Aurora would break the Bible’s commandment against idol worship by allowing the Hindu temple to be built.

> You know, once upon a time in Rome, Christians were the ones who refused to assimilate and were persecuted for it. Were the Romans justified in putting Christians to death because Christians refused to make obeisances or prayers or sacrifices to pagan idols or to celebrate pagan holidays? <

Komment Kontrol - wake up! Half these posts are worse than all the ones of mine you've nixed in the past.

It is peculiar, isn't it? Sometimes what seems like the most benign comment is censored, which is puzzling. For instance, in a follow-up comment to someone else's, I simply posted a direct link to an article in the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz. The article wasn't by me, it was by the Ha'aretz reporter, about how members of Congress have to pass a litmus test on certain issues concerning the Middle East. I still can't understand why that would not have gone through, considering some of the very strong comments in this thread. It's hard to know what might offend.

Dear Victoria: As a matter of fact, Christians do keep a relatively low profile in India but it hasn't done them much good. There has been a wave of church burnings and murders of Christians with the tacit connivance of the local Hindu-dominated governments (the police are never around when they happen).The press has mostly ignored this while it focusses on Hindu-Muslim reciprocal atrocities (many of them instigated or tolerated by the same Hindu authorities).

I'm tired of having this historical event shoved in my face. The attempted genocide of the jews by the nazis is the most important historical event to jews - it is not to the rest of us. I never thought that a Holocauast museum should be built in Washington D.C. It seems that the logical place for such a museum would be Germany or Israel.

Does it ever occur to rich jews who do these things, ostensibly on behalf of their people, that their brand is getting overexposed, and people are getting sick of them?

One thing I like about Jews is that they discourage converts, they get suspicious right away if someone wants to become Jewish. Not like these pesky Protestants who are always banging away on their drums, seeking new recruits for their version of the one true religion.

Dutch boy,Christians have a very high profile on TV, they seem to have purchased most of the spotsWhere do they get the money

Attacks on churches do not happen to the eastern rite churches that have been in India for 1500 years, since they dont proselytise These churches even share the elephant for processions with nearby Hindu temples

Attacks happen only where there is over-zealous proselytisation

Usually one caste converts, usually untouchable, and with church help start to encroach on the lands of other castes

The Orissa riots were a simple caste clash between untouchable neo-christian who were stealing affirmative action jobs from Hindu forest tribals

I agree that it makes little sense for a Holocaust museum to be put in AZ (as it made little sense to put one in DC, for that matter).

There's been a lot of talk in this thread about the First Amendment and the Establishment Clause. Well, the US Holocaust Memorial Museum finally gives us something that inarguably violates the Establishment Clause, as it is the direct result of a law passed by Congress.

""Does it ever occur to rich jews who do these things, ostensibly on behalf of their people, that their brand is getting overexposed, and people are getting sick of them?""

Maybe those rich Jews know that a lot of people hate them, and want to remind haters of hate's endgame."

Maybe they are creating animosity toward them where it did not previously exist. I think perhaps a lot of gentiles in this country are tired of the assumption that we are all latent Nazis (especially as many of us had / have relatives who fought Germany in WWII). Tired of the war on Christmas and hostility toward open displays of Christianity. Tired of the distortion of our immigration policy based on the sentimental attachments of people who were allowed to immigrate to this country.

Moreover, I'm interested what you have against hate? Do you mean that is unreasonable or illogical to hate? Ever? Wouldn't you agree that hatred can be perfectly rational (although certainly, some isn't)? Isn't it rational for Israelis to hate Palestinians? I should think it is - I certainly can't blame those Israelis who do.

"Moreover, I'm interested what you have against hate? Do you mean that is unreasonable or illogical to hate? Ever? Wouldn't you agree that hatred can be perfectly rational (although certainly, some isn't)? Isn't it rational for Israelis to hate Palestinians? I should think it is - I certainly can't blame those Israelis who do."

If you need me to explain to you why hate is bad, maybe it's time for you to go back to church. And no, I don't think it's rational for Israelis to hate Palestinians. Why should they hate them? What would hating them accomplish?

If you need me to explain to you why hate is bad, maybe it's time for you to go back to church. And no, I don't think it's rational for Israelis to hate Palestinians. Why should they hate them? What would hating them accomplish?"

I think it is bad to not hate someone who hates you, or who means you harm - indeed, it is naive and foolish.

And why should Israelis hate Palestinians? Gosh, I don't know - the suicide bombers, the fact that they do not recognize Israel as a legitimate state (look at their maps, for example), the unremitting hatred that Palestinians seem to hold for the Israelis.

You may have erred in basing your world view on a philosophy gleaned from the Star Wars movies (fear leads to anger leads to hate, yada, yada, yada - all that BS - as if fear, anger, and hate have no useful purpose).

Attacks on churches do not happen to the eastern rite churches that have been in India for 1500 years, since they dont proselytise These churches even share the elephant for processions with nearby Hindu temples

Upper caste Hindus do not attack eastern rite churches because eastern rite churches do not challenge the caste system.

I've read the gospels. Fairies and unicorns. Hell, the stories can't even agree on what day Jesus died and what happened after he allegedly rose from the dead.

And the two-way separation of church and state was definitely intended by the founders of the US. Read the work of Jefferson and Madison and you see clearly that they intended that religion not interfere with government as much as the other way around.

Yeah, so schools ignored this for a long time. Big deal, it still didn't make these things right or judicially defensible. Government religious neutrality is not only a blessing to and a protection of minority religions and those of us with no religions, but also to the minority sects of Christianity, including Catholicism and Mormonism.

PhilEastern rite christians also have untouchabilityThe Roman Catholic church also has untouchability with regular clashes between untouchable catholics and middle caste catholics

Do google up Eraiyur and Dalit

If you read the matrimonial columns in Indian newspapers, all the christians specify casteMany even specify no untouchable christians allowed

The Orissa situation is like thisIn the Kandhmahal districtThe population consists of 20% Dalit Pana christiansThese Dalit Pana were historically criminal caste ( like the Gypsies ) and expelled from nearby Hindu kingdoms for large scale theft and fraud

Tribal land cant be sold to non-TribalsTribal quotas cant be used for non-TribalsBecause this was a remote forested district, the Panas were able to get away with a lot until the backlash hit

Untouchable who convert to a non-Indian religion cant get quotas, whereas tribals canThe Dalit Panas first converted to christianity and still declared themselves Hindus to the govt and stole the jobs from Hindu DalitsThen they got fake certificates declaring themselves Tribals and stole land and jobs from the Tribals

All the maoists in this district are Pana Christians and the local churches practise Liberation TheologyThe Panas got the maoists to assassinate the Spiritual leader of the Tribals who was opposing the Pana tactics

These Tribals are historically martial race and do hit backNo upper caste Hindu was involved in the violence

In the Christian refugee camps it was discovered that virtually every Christian Pana had cheated the govt and declared themselves as Hindus to grab Affirmative Action benefits from Hindu Tribals and Hindu Untouchables

ve read the gospels. Fairies and unicorns. Hell, the stories can't even agree on what day Jesus died and what happened after he allegedly rose from the dead.i sincerely doubt you have read them. I don't doubt you have read some "Christianity sucks" article that makes statements like this, but i sincerely doubt you have read them. Of course, its quite talmadic of you to ridicule and spit on them.

And the two-way separation of church and state was definitely intended by the founders of the US. Read the work of Jefferson and Madisonsince you can no longer resort to facts you resort to making 'it is so statements'

rec1man said..."VictoriaIn India, missionaries put up all year crosses all over the place including Hindu pilgrimage spots, and sacred Hindu hills"

Are you serious? I am a Hindu guy from India. I hardly see crosses even though I had studied in a catholic convent during my schooling days. The majority of the children were Hindus but we never felt that Christianity was being pushed on us. I have never seen a cross in any Hindu temple and my dad being religious forcefully takes me along to Hindu temples. So I have seen a lot of temples. Never have I seen Christian missionaries go around putting crosses. What I do know that Hindus tend to have a more positive attitude towards Christianity than compared to Islam which is looked upon as a blood thirsty cult. However many Hindus (not my family) do look down upon Indian Christians. We Hindus do have superior complex feelings.

Satish , you are of course aware of the cross put up at Nilackal Hill on the Sabarimala pilgrimage path

Also, the Cross put up on Hindu temple land at Acharapakam, near Chennai

Also let me refer you to Andhra Pradesh Propagation of Other Religion in the Places of Worship or Prayer (Prohibition) Ordinance, 2007

And whereas, the State Government intends to bring an Ordinance to prohibit the propagation of other religions in certain notified places of worship belonging to any particular religion mainly to ensure that the sentiments of that religious group are not hurt and public order is not disturbed;

Offences and penalties.

Whoever contravenes the provisions contained in section 2 shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years or with fine up to Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand) or with both.--

This law was passed by a christian Chief Minister, late YSR, becausechristian missionaries were preaching INSIDE Ram temple at Bhadrachalam, and INSIDE Tirupati Hills, which land belongs to temple

This was leading to reprisal assaults and riots

You can see on youtube, christian pastors abusing Hindu gods and getting thrashed by the Hindu public in reprisals

Whatever it is, they look like rare incidents to me. I have been to many Hindu temples in maharastra, Gujrat, West Bengal, M.P., U.P Karnataka etc... I have been to Haridwar, Rishikesh etc... I have yet to see something like this. 99.9999% of Hindus do not come across Christians coming into our temples and preaching Christianity. Any Hindu living in India reading this will know I am speaking the truth. Christians make up a tiny 3% of our population.

Anyways on a different note, many Hindus do celebrate Christmas (compared to say Id, no Hindu celebrates Id except eating Biryani because Muslims make the best Biryani (a food item) ). In my office, there are only two Christians but we are all (most of us are Hindus) having a great Christmas party with Christmas trees and Santa and all. Besides there is a major difference between the U.S.A and the Republic of India. The U.S.A was formed in the 1700s as a Christian nation. Hinduism was largely unknown to the founding fathers and there were no Hindus in the U.S.A when it was formed. India was formed in 1947 as a secular nation with a sizable Christian minority when it was formed. Just because we officially celebrate Christmas in India does not mean the U.S.A has to officially celebrate Dipawali or Durga Puja or Ganesh Puja. Most western educated Indians have an idea of Christmas but the average American does not have much of idea about our religion. However most Indians do not know much about Easter. To the average American or European (or East Asian or African for that matter) it is weird and exotic. I would wish they know more about our faith, but we cannot force acceptance upon them in their own nation.

The family did not attend a synagogue in Chicago because, Mrs. Rosen said, "you didn't need a synagogue to have a Jewish identity." There were Jewish neighbors, Jewish friends, Jewish family. But not in Bentonville, where her daughter brought home from day care a picture of Jesus to color in. Suddenly, a synagogue did not seem like a luxury anymore, but a necessity to preserve her family's Jewish heritage.

Note that the woman speaks not of protecting her "beliefs" but of protecting her family's "heritage" and "identity." Beliefs are a religious thing. Heritage and identity, especially used together, denote concern with a person's ethnicity.

That is the woman, as with so many Jews, sees Judaism as a religion organized around ethnicity rather than belief. We know how the Left treats conservative, Christian religions that organize even loosely around ethnicity or race. Witness their castigation of the Mormons as racist for denying blacks the priesthood; or the revocation of tax-exempt statusof Bob Jones University for various politically incorrect offenses.

The Jews know how to protect their ethnic enclave, masquerading as religion, with all of the benefits, including tax-exemption, of a religion.

I am not saying it's wrong. I'm just wondering where WASPy white guys like me can get in on the deal. Jews always seem to manage to protect themselves from the consequences of their own strident leftism. Jews were all foursquare in favor of mandatory desegregation, but they are no more likely (far less likley, actually) to experience its "blessings" than the rest of us, including school desgregation.

In Memphis when the schools were forcibly desegregated, including via busing, the whites had to sell their homes and flee to the separate Shelby County schools in order to avoid the blessings of desegregation. In the Jewish neighborhood of Shady Grove, the Jews simply had "optional programs" for "gifted children" installed in their neighborhood schools, including White Station High School. The result is that Jewish kids don't actually have to spend any time in class with black children.

I had a Jewish friend who attended White Station's optional program. His father was (literally) a card-carrying member of the ACLU. When this guy got kicked out of the optional program did he join black kids in their classrooms, in a joyous celebration of the benefits of desegregation? Nope - he somehow managed to transfer to the nearest mostly white Shelby County District high school.

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.